Questions are being raised over whether police intentionally set his hideout on fire after police officials confirmed the use of incendiary tear gas. An audio recording from a police scanner appears to show officials from the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department planning to deploy "burners." In another recording that was aired live on the television station KCAL, a police officer can be heard in the background shouting, "We’re going to burn him out," and "Burn it down!” We are joined by former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper, who says, "Whether it was intentional or not, a very predictable outcome of deploying seven burners in what appears to have been a wooden cabin would predictably leave it in rubble."

from PD tape:

MALE VOICE: All right, Steve, we’re going to go—we’re going to go forward with the plan, with—with the burner.

MALE VOICE: We want it, uh, like we talked about.

MALE VOICE: Seven of the burners deployed, and we have a fire.

FEMALE VOICE: Copy. Seven burners deployed, and we have a fire.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Police say the phrase "burner" referred to a grenade-like canister containing flammable tear gas. In another recording that was aired live on the TV station KCAL, a police officer can be heard in the background shouting, "We’re going to burn him out," and "Burn it down."

KCAL REPORTER: We do know that authorities were searching for a man in a Dodge pickup truck.

POLICE OFFICER: The last location of the suspect [inaudible].

POLICE OFFICER: We’re going to [bleep] burn him out!"

POLICE OFFICER: [inaudible] I don’t know.

POLICE OFFICER: Let’s burn it down.

POLICE OFFICER: Get going, right now!

POLICE OFFICER: Burn this [bleep]!

KCAL REPORTER: Police officers, understandably, upset.

AMY GOODMAN: On Wednesday, San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon admitted his deputies deployed the highly flammable hot gas canisters, but denied they intentionally started the fire.

now here's a statement that sounds like Bullshito ot me:
SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON: I can tell you that it was not on purpose. We did not intentionally burn down that cabin to get Mr. Dorner out. The tear gas canisters that we used—first off, we used a presence when we showed up. Secondly, we used a cold tear gas. Then we used—the next tear gas was that that was pyrotechnic, does generate a lot of heat. We introduced those canisters into the residence, and a fire erupted.

The real question is did they want to destroy him for some reason other than hatred? Is there anything going on besides emotional disturbance? It's either a terrible example of LEOs taking the law into their own hands or something even worse.

"Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

New cheap fireproof materials discovered

Originally Posted by patfromlogan

The real question is did they want to destroy him for some reason other than hatred? Is there anything going on besides emotional disturbance? It's either a terrible example of LEOs taking the law into their own hands or something even worse.

This is what is so disturbing about your line of thinking. You show good evidence of what needs to be investigated but then drop everything except fully nefarious explanations. They may have been using fire as the method for applying deadly force because this guy had a record of killing cops during gun fights. As public servants engaged in civilian law enforcement they should be truthful about what they do and what they do should be subject to administrative and legal review. Not to mention open investigations to allow a fully informed public. However, you skip right to full on conspiracy theory. It is obvious to you it must be part of a vast cover-up. You don't even give the possibility it is a small cover-up.

Questions are being raised over whether police intentionally set his hideout on fire after police officials confirmed the use of incendiary tear gas. An audio recording from a police scanner appears to show officials from the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department planning to deploy "burners." In another recording that was aired live on the television station KCAL, a police officer can be heard in the background shouting, "We’re going to burn him out," and "Burn it down!” We are joined by former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper, who says, "Whether it was intentional or not, a very predictable outcome of deploying seven burners in what appears to have been a wooden cabin would predictably leave it in rubble."

from PD tape:

MALE VOICE: All right, Steve, we’re going to go—we’re going to go forward with the plan, with—with the burner.

MALE VOICE: We want it, uh, like we talked about.

MALE VOICE: Seven of the burners deployed, and we have a fire.

FEMALE VOICE: Copy. Seven burners deployed, and we have a fire.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Police say the phrase "burner" referred to a grenade-like canister containing flammable tear gas. In another recording that was aired live on the TV station KCAL, a police officer can be heard in the background shouting, "We’re going to burn him out," and "Burn it down."

KCAL REPORTER: We do know that authorities were searching for a man in a Dodge pickup truck.

POLICE OFFICER: The last location of the suspect [inaudible].

POLICE OFFICER: We’re going to [bleep] burn him out!"

POLICE OFFICER: [inaudible] I don’t know.

POLICE OFFICER: Let’s burn it down.

POLICE OFFICER: Get going, right now!

POLICE OFFICER: Burn this [bleep]!

KCAL REPORTER: Police officers, understandably, upset.

AMY GOODMAN: On Wednesday, San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon admitted his deputies deployed the highly flammable hot gas canisters, but denied they intentionally started the fire.

now here's a statement that sounds like Bullshito ot me:
SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON: I can tell you that it was not on purpose. We did not intentionally burn down that cabin to get Mr. Dorner out. The tear gas canisters that we used—first off, we used a presence when we showed up. Secondly, we used a cold tear gas. Then we used—the next tear gas was that that was pyrotechnic, does generate a lot of heat. We introduced those canisters into the residence, and a fire erupted.

The real question is did they want to destroy him for some reason other than hatred? Is there anything going on besides emotional disturbance? It's either a terrible example of LEOs taking the law into their own hands or something even worse.

In an effort to conflate multiple conspiracies, remember all those people jumping to their deaths from WTC? The fire was too hot, and they presumably risked surviving falling hundreds of feet rather than burning to death. Dorner didn't have to burn alive or plunge to his death, he could have just walked out a door with his hands up. In other words, Dorner chose to die.

You should meet my friend, William of Ockham. You cannot blame SBSD or any other department for his death. It was by Dorner's hand alone that all this came about.